► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘NY Times’

Not us, The New York Slimes Squeals, we are your servants, we helped you.

by Guest Post ( 60 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Progressives at March 26th, 2014 - 7:00 am

Gust Blogger: Doriangrey


The German’s invented a very special word, it’s Schadenfreude, it is defined as follows.

scha·den·freu·de
noun, often capitalized \ˈshä-dən-ˌfrȯi-də\

: a feeling of enjoyment that comes from seeing or hearing about the troubles of other people

It’s not a pretty word, in fact, it’s a word that describes one of mankind’s lowest and most undesirable characteristic. The problem is, that the human race is an incredible contradiction. It is filled with Angels and Demons living side by side as it were. Some human beings are kind, compassionate, generous, wonderful beings, others are selfish, narcissistic, abusive, psychopaths, most people fall somewhere in-between.

The Christian bible tells us that eventually the meek will inherit the earth, empirical evidence tells us that the meek will end up under the jack boot of the soulless oppressive psychopaths amongst us. It is this dichotomy of realities that produces Schadenfreude. We know that we should not feel pleasure or joy at the misfortunes of others, and then we watch as people like those employed by the New York Times lie their collective asses off, and not only get away with it, but profit from doing so.

NYT reporter calls Obama WH the “greatest enemy of press freedom”

Thus testifies James Risen, the New York Times reporter reviled by the Bush administration for his probes and exposés of highly-classified government efforts to curtail terrorism. Risen may have had his issues with the Bush White House over his scoops and his sources, but they apparently pale in comparison to what he’s experiencing under Bush’s successor. Speaking to a symposium on press freedom, Risen minced no words in describing the threat to journalists from the Barack Obama administration:

New York Times reporter James Risen, who is fighting an order that he testify in the trial of Jeffrey Sterling, a former CIA officer accused of leaking information to him, opened the conference earlier by saying the Obama administration is “the greatest enemy of press freedom that we have encountered in at least a generation.” The administration wants to “narrow the field of national security reporting,” Risen said, to “create a path for accepted reporting.” Anyone journalist who exceeds those parameters, Risen said, “will be punished.”

The administration’s aggressive prosecutions have created “a de facto Official Secrets Act,” Risen said, and the media has been “too timid” in responding.

Toobin appeared on a panel that followed, moderated by Times Supreme Court reporter Adam Liptak, who announced that if he weren’t a paragon of journalistic detachment, he’d say “the persecution of James Risen is a scandal.” The attorney Laura Handman noted that the U.S. Department of Justice’s new guidelines for accessing journalists’ records carve out a big space for the government to decide what constitutes “ordinary newsgathering.”

The panel mentioned Risen and Fox journalist James Rosen, who an FBI agent suggested was a “co-conspirator” in another leak investigation.

It wasn’t just that an FBI agent “suggested” that Rosen was a co-conspirator in espionage. It’s that the allegation was presented as part of a probable-cause warrant to conduct surveillance on Rosen — a move that required the approval of Attorney General Eric Holder, who has dodged questions about how that warrant request got approved.

Jeffrey Toobin and Obama administration lawyer Robert Litt tried to justify the war on reporters:

Robert Litt, the administration’s top lawyer for the national intelligence community, agreed with that statement. At the same conference, he likened reporting on national security leaks to drunk driving, arguing that we ban the practice despite the fact that there isn’t always a victim.

“Not every drunk driver causes a fatal accident,” he explained, “but we ban drunk driving because it increases the risk of accidents. In the same way, we classify information because of the risk of harm, even if no harm actually can be shown in the end from any particular disclosure.”

James Risen and the New York Times are utterly and completely mistaken, it is not the Obama Administration that are the greatest enemies of press freedom, it is the mainstream media themselves who are not only the greatest threat to press freedom, but freedom and liberty period. The mainstream media in America were once defined as being the watchdogs of freedom and liberty, as such their very institution was specifically included in the First amendment to the United States Constitutions Bill of Rights.

The problem is, that the Founding Fathers of the United States never even in their worst nightmare ever dreamed that the Fourth Estate would be subverted by individuals dedicated to a political ideology that was diametrical opposed to everything they believed and held sacred. Now, having done everything in their power to pervert the American political system in order to advance their Marxist/Socialist political agenda, and discovering that the monster they unleashed fully intended to eat them as well, the New York Slimes decides to complain about it.

This is where the Schadenfreude come in.

Like 95% of the rest of the Mainstream Media, the New York Times were co-conspirators in bringing the Obama Administration to power. They knowingly and willfully with a full forethought of Malice lied to and deceived American’s with regard to exactly who and what Barack Obama was. They believed that because Barack Obama, like themselves, was a Marxist/Socialist that helping to arrange his ascension to power would result in their desired Marxist Utopia becoming a reality.

Marxists are unique individuals, perhaps King Solomon when writing the Book of Proverbs was having a rare flash of the future, and wrote this as a result. “Though thou shouldest bray a fool in a mortar among wheat with a pestle, yet will not his foolishness depart from him.” It certainly is one of the best descriptions of Marxist/Socialists that have ever been written. Marxism is not a new political ideology, it’s been around since the mid 1800′s. It is not a untried political ideology, it has been tried nearly a hundred times, and every single time, it has produced nearly identical results.

Yet, like the fool referred to in Proverbs 27:22, those Marxists who have never actually lived under a Marxist controlled government, no matter what you show them, teach them, bring to them as incontrovertible evidence, you cannot remove their insanity from them. Invariably, they resort to the same illogical irrational line of defense. “It would have worked, if only the right people had been in charge”. Even Bob Hope, way back in 1940, had these fools pegs for what they are.

Marxism is a political ideology designed by, and exclusively to create a ruling class for psychopaths. In normal human society, the only thing that keeps the average kitchen variety of psychopath from becoming a serial killer, is a healthy dose of self preservation. While the list of serial killers documents those generally accepted to have been serial killers, it leaves out the most prolific serial killers of all time, Joesph Stalin, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot, Che Guevara, yea, that’s right, most prolific serial killers in human history, serial killers who clocked and concealed their psychopathic serial killer nature by dressing it up in the garments of Marxist political ideology.

The Devil, Satan, that Old Dragon, Lucifer, the Father of all lies, has no friends, no servants, no relatives, no lovers, no accomplices, no allies. He has only one moral, ethical, religious principal, “The End Justifies the Means”. He is the avatar, the icon, the mold from which every psychopath or sociopath was cast. To him, and every psychopath, sociopath or true Marxist believer, every human being on the face of the planet represent only possible means to an end.

As the New York times now turns in anger, pain and surprise, bleating out the entirely expected and inevitable cry… “Not us, we are your servants, we helped you”. While it might be wrong of us, those of us who are watching, who know the role that the New York Times and 95% of the rest of the Mainstream Media played in “Fundamentally Transforming” America into a Marxist Utopia cannot but help feeling the Schadenfreude…

(Cross Posted @ The Wilderness of Mirrors)

Even the left-wing propaganda rag, The New York Slimes, can’t stomach Obama’s lies.

by Phantom Ace ( 129 Comments › )
Filed under Blogmocracy, Democratic Party, Guest Post, Marxism, Progressives at August 8th, 2013 - 3:00 pm

Guest Blogger: Doriangrey


Nobody was surprised yesterday when conservatives called out Obama on his blatant lie regard the US Federal Government spying on the American people, that was a given. Today’s delicious schadenfreude is brought to you at the expense of millions of brain-dead liberal Marxist Democrats all across America who today are frantically recalibrating their cognitive dissonance to keep their heads from exploding.

NYT: No spying on Americans? Au contraire

posted at 9:21 am on August 8, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

On Tuesday, Barack Obama insisted that the US government isn’t spying on Americans by surveilling the contents of their communications. Less than two days later, the New York Times makes hash of that claim. The NSA, reports Charlie Savage, sifts through the content of “vast amounts” of electronic communications between Americans and people abroad in their search for links to terrorism, and not just the metadata:

The National Security Agency is searching the contents of vast amounts of Americans’ e-mail and text communications into and out of the country, hunting for people who mention information about foreigners under surveillance, according to intelligence officials.

The N.S.A. is not just intercepting the communications of Americans who are in direct contact with foreigners targeted overseas, a practice that government officials have openly acknowledged. It is also casting a far wider net for people who cite information linked to those foreigners, like a little used e-mail address, according to a senior intelligence official.

While it has long been known that the agency conducts extensive computer searches of data it vacuums up overseas, that it is systematically searching — without warrants — through the contents of Americans’ communications that cross the border reveals more about the scale of its secret operations.

Well, it’s not like anyone actually bought that nonsense from Obama on the Tonight Show. Even one of Obama’s former key aides, Van Jones, openly scoffed at the claim that the NSA wasn’t spying on Americans:

“Everybody knows I love this president, but this is ridiculous,” said Jones. “We do have a spying program, and we need to figure out how to balance these out.”

Jones also criticized the Obama administration’s treatment of whistleblowers.

“You are prosecuting more whistleblowers than every American president combined,” said Jones. “You can’t yuck it up and say, well, whistleblowers come on out and we’ll treat you right.”

How does the NSA choose its targets? Generously, at least in regard to cross-border collection:

To conduct the surveillance, the N.S.A. is temporarily copying and then sifting through the contents of what is apparently most e-mails and other text-based communications that cross the border. The senior intelligence official, who, like other former and current government officials, spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the topic, said the N.S.A. makes a “clone of selected communication links” to gather the communications, but declined to specify details, like the volume of the data that passes through them.

I have absolutely no sympathy or compassion for those who have made “The end justifies the means” their only moral or ethical standard. I opposed and found “The Patriot Act” repugnant when enacted by the Bush Administration. Spying isn’t wrong because it’s being done on the authorization of Barack Insane Obama. It’s wrong because it is a violation of the United States Constitution. It’s wrong because it is what tyrants and despots do, not what free people do to their CITIZENS.

Sadly, that vast majority of the liberal left are those for whom the ideology that “The end justifies the means” is their only moral or ethical standard. They will give their full and unrestricted approval to anything that their party does, yet would vehemently decry the exact same practices or policies if done by the opposition. They have absolutely no moral or ethical stands beyond what they perceive as winning.

The only reason that the New York Slime’s or Van Jones are making any effort to correct Barack Insane Obama, is that they know that anything they give blanket approval over that Obama does, when the Republicans reclaim the Whitehouse, will be fair game for the Republicans to employ by their own moral and ethical standards.

Neither the New York Slime’s nor Van Jones are suggesting that their is anything wrong with the federal government spying on American’s, they are just carefully hedging their bet’s so that when a Republican Administration is voted in, they will not be trapped into claiming that spying isn’t as Whoopie Goldberg would say, spying spying.

(Cross Posted @ The Wilderness of Mirrors)

Comedy Gold: David Brooks claims that Obama is fiscally responsible!

by Phantom Ace ( 235 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Economy, Entertainment, Humor, Open thread at April 17th, 2012 - 5:00 pm

David Brooks, along with Peggy Noonan, Kathleen Parker, Chris Buckley, Colin Powell, JC Watts and Susan Eisenhower were called the Obamicans. These were Republicans who in 2008 voted and supported Obama. Most of those mentioned have now turned against the Pharaoh. David Brooks is still a die hard believer. He claims that Obama is a fiscally responsible Liberal. Yes, you read that correctly, Brooks believes Obama is fiscally responsible!

I’ve been critical of President Obama’s budgets. I’ve argued that while I like the way Obama preserves spending on things like scientific research and programs for the vulnerable, he doesn’t do enough to avoid a debt crisis.

[….]

Extremely senior members of the administration believe these sorts of criticisms are completely unfair and vastly underestimate their fiscal hawkishness. In this column, I thought it only fair that I provide you with a summary of their arguments.

First, their goals. They argue that it’s foolish to try to solve the debt problem with some drastic magic bullet all at once. It’s smarter to stabilize the debt while also looking after other needs, like protecting the vulnerable and investing in things that boost growth and mobility.

They argue that the president’s 2013 budget is a step toward fiscal stability that will also pave the way for bigger steps in the years ahead. They estimate that their budget would produce $5 trillion in budget savings over a decade. It would raise $1.5 trillion in new revenue by raising taxes on those making more than $250,000 a year.

[….]

Basically, what we’re looking at is a period of stability, administration officials say, which would soothe credit markets and give us time to make further adjustments. This, they conclude, is responsible prudence.

I’m not going to pass my own comprehensive judgment on this here. I’ll just say that my conversations reaffirm my conviction that Obama is a pragmatic liberal who cares about fiscal sustainability, who has been willing to compromise for its sake, but who has not offered anything close to a sufficient program to avoid a debt crisis.

But we have a campaign in front of us. If the president is truly committed to a strategy for progressive fiscal stability, as Bill Clinton was, he’ll make that the center of his campaign. He’ll earn a mandate. He’ll win over independents who want fiscal discipline but worry about the way Republicans get there.

David Brooks will vote for Obama. This clown is not a  Conservative, but a  Progressives masquerading as a Conservative like David Frum. His claim that the Pharaoh’s regime wants fiscal responsibility is just laughable. David Brooks is water carrier for the regime and he should not be taken serious. To him, Obama is our divine god-king who is leading America to a greater future. Brooks would be writing favorable of Stalin, Hitler or Mao is they were still ar0ound.

This is not a serious thread because David Brooks is not a serious commentator. He’s just a saner version of Charles Johnson.

 

NY Times claims Obama is now trying to push Job creation

by Phantom Ace ( 36 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Economy, Media at January 22nd, 2011 - 6:30 pm

After a year of claiming we are in a historic economic boom, The NY times claims Obama will now push for job creation. The reason for this theme is what I ave been arguing here, the theme of 2012 is that this is as good as it will get. The Progressives will claim Obama is really trying to create jobs, but that corporate America is not helping him. This is a typical 3rd world liberation tactic of a failed leader claiming he’s trying but others are in the way.

Three days before Christmas, President Obama gathered his economic team in the West Wing’s Roosevelt Room to review themes for his State of the Union address. The edge-of-the-cliff crisis he inherited had passed, but with more than 14 million Americans still out of work, he was looking for bold ways to bring down unemployment. The ideas presented to him, though, seemed familiar and uninspired. “You know, guys,” he said, according to someone in the room, “I’ve told you before, I want you to come to me with ideas that excite me.” Nothing he was hearing excited him.

[…]

Obama is fighting to keep Republicans, fresh from their fall electoral triumph, from reversing what he has started while prodding his own team to come up with something, anything, to put people back to work. “The president wanted to lower unemployment but didn’t see a way to get more money out of Congress,” one adviser who sat in on many such meetings told me. “He grew frustrated because the economic team didn’t have that magic combination.” Or as another adviser put it, “He was really frustrated that there weren’t solutions on the cheap.”

Read the rest: The White House Looks for Work

Obama’s attitude is startling, he really believes government can create jobs. This idea is devoid of reality and truly a fallacy. Instead of pushing fundamental tax and regulatory reform, he thinks that twisting the arms of business leaders will create joins. Never mind that he pushed Obamacare and the resulting higher insurance costs lead many companies to not increase wages.

As always the NY Times paints a rosy picture of this Obama Boom.

There is a compelling case that Obamanomics has produced results. An economy that was shrinking in size and bleeding more than 700,000 jobs a month is now growing at 2.6 percent and added 1.1 million jobs last year. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, known as the stimulus, produced or saved at least 1.9 million jobs and as many as 4.7 million last year, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The much-derided Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, started by George W. Bush and continued by Obama, stabilized the financial sector, and the big banks have repaid the money with interest. According to a Treasury Department report sent to Congress this month, TARP will cost taxpayers $28 billion instead of the $700 billion originally set aside. The nearly $80 billion bailout of the auto industry may cost taxpayers only $15 billion, as the restructured General Motors and Chrysler come back to life with strong sales. The stock market has surged; corporate profits are setting records.

That’s right, 2.6% growth and 1.1 million jobs created last year is considered an economic miracle. When Bush had similar numbers in 2004-2007, it was called anemic and stagnant. This is the politics of low expectations that Obama hopes will get him re-elected in 20o12. Thus he will appear to be actually trying find ways to create jobs, when in reality he will not take the steps to restore American economic opportunity.

The NY Times can spin it all they want, but Obama doesn’t know what he’s doing.